Okay. . .
There are a lot of ideas here that I like and some interesting interplay between them, but I think it's weak in some parts and I think it flat out doesn't work in others.
Yeah, before I start replying I should probably mention these are works from my amateur hour. I'm not saying I'm a pro now; I'm just saying everything you see ova' there is me not knowing shit and gunning it regardless. I still don't know shit now but I know significantly more shit than I did back then. I essentially YOLO'd this bitch like no tomorrow. If I ever attempt a rewrite on this, it'll be drastically different than what you see here.
Starting with the least bothersome: formatting. You completely overuse italics. Everything is italics and that's bogged down because you include speech as italics. It hurts my eyes and make its visually unappealing. It also lessens the effectiveness of emphasis when everything is italics.
The italics are supposed to be a sort of replacement for dialogue, because in reality, they're not really talking, but doing some pseudo-telekenisis to send their thoughts into the subject's head. Those italics are supposed to be rudimentary interpretation of what they could be saying if they spoke shit.
As you can see, it didn't work. It ended up being really fucking terrible. The reason I didn't use normal dialogue is because of variables surrounding the woman herself (more on THAT later).
In terms of emphasis, there are honestly none. Like I said, it's meant to be a substitution for the not-dialogue I wanted to show. I can definitely format it better, looking at it now but yeah, I can tell it's a chore to read, even from my perspective. It's a bitch for me; I wouldn't wanna imagine what it was like for you.
On a technical level, you're writing is fine, but the prose was weak in parts. You'd hem and haw with some narration and use excessive words and sentences. The one that stuck out to me is when you described something and then said "apparently." That can be used if there is some confusion from the POV, but there didn't seem to be. You had another moment when you really smudged your imagery towards the end. You are describing the woman going to the bathroom naked, but then you also describe the sky as naked. It's a good description on its own, but in context you're pulling the same imagery from an entirely different concept with no real juxtaposition or relatedness there; e.g. she was naked like the sky. For a third example, you failed in establishing early on. You start saying woman without ever saying who that is. It's all she she she, until there's a girl there and then its the girl and the woman.
I'll come back to the prose, but I want to inform something regarding the establishing of the "woman". What was happening during that scene is that there's actually two subjects during the majority of the story. One was the woman. And the other was the
women.
Note the italics, they were supposed to be a distinction. What I was trying to do is seperate both the woman and the
women/girl/lady/teen using italics, because they're ALL supposed to be nameless entities. I haven't quite grasped accurate prepositions by then so I did a makeshift workaround by seperating them two with different word formattings, the results of which were, well, in hindsight, very self-explanatory.
Now back to the prose. Yes, I am very ham-fisted now, but back then, the dial was turned up to 11 with a tape holding it there. I was the kind of guy to scoff at SAO enjoyers and call CoD players "intellectually deprived". You could imagine the kind of story a guy like that would write on paper. I'm not putting the full blame on the passing on time; it's a problem of mine to steer towards abstract expressionism and weird ass prose to get my point across. Up to today, I'm still not trusting of my audience to get the memo and end up overexplaning and convoluting everything.
So yes, the "she's as naked as the sky" line was supposed to be some double whammy that'll wind up to "oh, she's naked, and the sky is naked, so that means that the woman is naked and the sky has no stars, hence it's naked". Evidently, you could see how well that worked.
As for the "apparently" phenomenon, I'll explain further.
And then the ideas also got smudgy for me as you throw out a lot of stuff there that detracts from the central narrative. And I'll say upfront, I might be confused and missed things. So the story is about this woman who is either a) lying about who she is or b) completely disassociating her identity. Both of those things are great and the fact that it could be read either way is great, but then she's married to an alien? And this just adds in a whole new layer of what. What does that have to do with the ideas of the story? Why did she have this dream conversation about not being able to tell a boy that she liked him. . . when she's married to him. The final elements are distracting, confusing, and I'm not sure they mesh with what's been discussed so far.
Okay, I should probably mention this beforehand. If I were to say this BEFORE you read this, you wouldn't have as much interest towards your confusion as you have now.
This is actually a precursor to a story I have planning. I haven't written it yet, so this is essentially some alpha episode/pilot concept to one of the themes of that story. Namely, those of self discovery, confusion and confliction.
Said confusing elements like the monster marriage are PART of that unwritten story I'm still planning. And that I will explain further down below.
I'd appreciate an explanation for the story: both what's happening literally and what the take away is supposed to be.
Okay, here's a TL;DR of the story. I hope it clears things up.
A woman is dreaming. She dreams of an endless field with a swing set atop a hill. When she goes onto the swing she meets 4 versions of her past self. Namely,
the girl, the teen, the woman and
the lady.
Now, this woman here has a problem. She's got a person she loves and has already married. The problem is that she isn't what she seems to be. She's been hiding an aspect of herself from the one she's married. He has absolutely NO IDEA that she isn't human whatsoever. Now, her dilemma is the emotional conflict between keeping the lie and leaving the relationship intact but risk her integrity and sanity, or finally let go of the truth, and let the boat rock.
The girl, which is her youngest self, represents her innocent love. When asked the question, she answers as straightforward as possible. If you love the guy, why not stay with the guy? That's
her solution.
However,
the teen represents the cynicism of that same token. Who's to say he's going to stay? It needs no bigger explanation; don't risk that shit, and keep the lie up. The pain might be great, but there's no telling how bad it'll get in the future.
As the woman's past self gets older, she meets
the woman. This
woman is the peak of her cynicism. This cynicism actually ties into the bigger story, which, as stated, isn't written yet. But long story short, she has a bad history between her secret self and her husband's species.
The woman suffered the BRUNT of that bad history, and
she represents absolute self-protection. Don't even THINK of risking that shit.
She's the type of woman to swallow the cyanide pill if the risk ever even arises.
She is what the woman grew out of, and
she's NOT what she wants to return to. Hence, she Force Mind Wipes™
her away, but not forever, as it is still a part of what the woman once was.
The lady is supposed to be a culmination of all the woman's experience. It is at this point where most readers would be at the height of their confusion. They've done their toll through the word count and all they really understand is that the woman has a problem and
the girl, the teen and the woman have given nothing but questions, more questions, and a vague idea of what the woman COULD'VE been throughout her life.
The lady shows that at this point, the woman should've made a decision, and dips out without giving an answer. I admit, I've overcooked the mystery at this point, but
the lady is supposed to show how far the woman have stalled this shit. She is supposed to have solved this dilemma she's in but yet, she hasn't. It's like a final drop in the "WHAT THE FUCK IS GOING ON" bucket before it deluges out when the alien steps in.
Spoiler alert: the alien is the woman's true self.
The alien isn't some seperate entity operating in a different mind. It is just that; the woman's true, alien self. Square head, lean tall body and all. The woman herself is the façade she puts out. This is where the mystery gets revealed. The dilemma, as stated, is that the woman has someone she loves. But that someone she loves loved her back at her different self. It's simply a lie she put on and now her husband's fallen for that. She is unsure whether revealing the truth would perma severe the tie she holds so dear, and thus she
Lie, Again.
*Wink wink
The description of the man in question; yes, no head and skinny body, is supposed to be a non variable. His species, race, trait and all are supposed to be non variables. All that matters is that he thinks the woman's human. As for WHY the husband's that way, it's again part of the story I've planned but have yet put on paper. I know it's an overplayed cop out at this point and I admit, it kinda is. I have next to no excuse for this shit. I say "next to no" because it was written two years ago, and if you were to offer me one hundred dollars to punch myself from two years ago, I would do it for free.
Back on topic the woman wakes up in the real world, next to the man, the myth, the legend: the husband. She goes to the bathroom and this is where all the questions beforehand gets revealed. The woman isn't a woman; but an alien. She only does this when she's alone, far from her husband's sight. If that wasn't enough of a clue, she LeBron James three pointer slams the box back on her head the moment she hears him stepping into the bathroom. And if THAT wasn't enough, the husband, a.k.a Creepus, even states that he'll comfort his wife's problem no matter how HUMAN they are, which we know the woman definitely isn't.
The main takeaway from all of this is as literal as it gets. What if mutual love isn't really mutual, but one built on a one sided lie? The story is only supposed to pose the question, not the answer. The conclusion is purposefully left open ended so that readers can interpret however they like. You're not supposed to dictate how the story would end, but what the woman should do. Should she hold onto the truth and swallow the gradually growing pill choking her up and risk losing her crumbling integrity or reveal the truth and risk losing the love of her life?
That is, essentially, the whole message. Yes, I took a very, VERY convoluted road to get there, but I was a very pretentious writer. I still am, just not as obnoxious as before. What if two people love each other but one of them is lying? Thinking about it now I didn't need cosmic fever hotline calling dreams to relay it.
